MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1649740783 · doi:10.1029/2011gl048115

Theoretical constraints on pure vapor-pressure driven condensation of organics to ultrafine particles

2011· article· en· W1649740783 on OpenAlexaff
Neil M. Donahue, Erica R. Trump, Jeffrey R. Pierce, Ilona Riipinen

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNucleationVolatility (finance)CondensationSaturation (graph theory)Range (aeronautics)Gas phaseMaterials scienceUltrafine particleVapor pressureChemical engineeringChemical physicsThermodynamicsChemistryNanotechnologyOrganic chemistryPhysicsComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

[1] Organic condensation to freshly nucleated particles contributes substantially to their growth. Here we explore a range of constraints on this process, under the assumption that gas-phase oxidation of organic vapors by hydroxy radical is forming organics with a sufficiently low volatility to condense onto particles in the 2–20 nm size range. To condense but not homogeneously nucleate, vapors need to have saturation concentrations (C*) in the 10−3 − 10−2μg m−3 range, and this is exactly the range that gas-phase chemistry is likely to produce. At least half of the observed growth rate of ultrafine particles can be explained by these simple considerations and constraints.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.232 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations130
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosolsFrench-language works237,207